MallardDrake

And is it best for someone with trouble with long irons to get an actual hybrid (a miniature fairway metal head version) instead of the "driving iron" versions? Or are these "driving irons" significantly different in design (generally speaking) that though they look like irons they actually are designed nothing like them? While some are obviously juiced up with design features, some resemble just an average GI iron head with a graphite shaft.

Here's something I've always wondered: is a hybrid corresponding to a number (2, 3, 4, etc) supposed to REPLACE that number iron. I only ask because my current 4 hybrid I hit about 20 yards further than my current 4 iron. If I removed the 4 iron, I'd have a jumbo gap between clubs. Ideally, is it best to forget about the "number" on the hybrid and just fill distance gaps?

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Does anyone who used aftermarket insoles in golf shoes have any comments on the types of shoes they work best in? A long, long shot: anybody reading this thread either a podiatrist and/or a shoe designer or related profession? What besides gripping the turf and providing at least a modicum of support are golf shoes supposed to do? With respect to the bottom of the foot and associated swing mechanics, does support or lack thereof in certain areas of the foot translate into issues with the golf swing?

Thanks for replies. So, is it fair to assume that collectively what is being communicated is that modifiable variable of various shaft parameters have an impact so negligible or nonexistent on ball flight of long irons that it didn't even warrant being mentioned? Well, talking about swing speed... what is the swing speed (standardized to your driver swing-speed, if you know what I'm saying) cutoff for carrying a 4, 5, and 6 iron? Is the modern philosophy now that no matter what the shaft (length, weight, material, kickpoint, flex), slow swingers need hybrids?

I've gotten to the point where I often need to use aftermarket insoles for my feet to be comfortable. As some may know, many/most aftermarket insoles basically add 5-10mm of stand-height to shoes, and don't often necessarily fit very well in modern shoes. Now, with some golf shoes having large, thick midsoles and bottoms, I feel like I'm standing on blocks with a Superfeet Green in an Adidas shoe. My particular shoe has a foamy thick midsole and a high-feeling stand-height to begin with. A side point is that I'm finding that maybe somewhat-rigid and supportive aftermarket insoles don't mesh well with new modern midsoles and outsole foams/thermoplastics that are often designed to be like they are for functionality. Perhaps rigid insoles work best in traditional, rigid golf shoes?

As it pertains to equipment, what is typically the most common cause of someone struggling to get height on long irons? What I'm looking for is (for example): shaft weight, swingweight, total weight, shaft flex, kick-point, etc. Due to swingweight and other design realities (I have a mizuno iron that has exactly one stock offering), is getting a set of irons re-shafted a losing battle for the average consumer going to a big-box store?

I’ve found FJ shoes I try on almost always slip in the heel when walking. Some other brands do as well, but nothing like FJ. And it’s at the point where my actual real shoe size (rarely worn by anyone) is even slipping in the heel Do FJ shoes run long, is the heel too wide, or do they construct shoes without regard for the heel hold while walking? Honestly the shape of their shoe last (the virtual dummy foot the shoe is shaped for) is bizarre (wide heels with narrow forefoot). not to get defensive, but this isn’t a cheap product knock; Nike shoes run excessively small, Puma’s current year is built for aliens, Adidas is all over the place and with atrocious foam insoles, and Ecco shoes fit nice but look like Jetson’s shoes.